View Single Post
Old 07-21-2008, 08:56 AM   #33 (permalink)
needs more cowbell
dcb's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 269 Times in 212 Posts
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
But I'd just ask you to think about why you're out there on the highway at all.
Cuz they are my roads too. I'm not paying all those taxes so only people travelling at the upper limit or above can use the damn things. But I do not frequent them as I do not have the aerodynamic mods to get as good mpg even at the minimum limit.

Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
If it's dangerous, as you say it is, and you care about safety, then why not just stay home?
This was in response to the poster who said collisions on the hiway are more the fault of the slow people than the fast people and that there is no correlation between speed and safety. The data I've seen does not support that. Like I said, I don't really care if someone speeds, I just am calling out this lapse in logic, and don't like folks telling me what roads I should use based on that faulty logic.

Indeed if anybody thinks putting more energy into a system doesn't increase the danger, consider the difference between someone throwing a bullet at you and shooting it.

This is 1st grade physics folks. Faster cars have more energy, more energy = more spectacular crashes. Try running into something at 1 mph. The driver who puts more energy into his(her) vehicle (and wastes energy doing it) is the one more responsible when (s)he isn't paying enough attention and rearends someone. That is how the courts will see it in %99.999 of the cases where someone is rearended. That's how I see it to, you need to not run into other people with your vehicle regardless of the posted speed limit, they may have just hit something themselves.

Stuff happens.

Last edited by dcb; 07-21-2008 at 09:35 AM..
  Reply With Quote